Wednesday, January 16, 2008

Meet Ms. Lori Andreachuk - a divorce lawyer who was given the authority by the Alberta Human Rights Tribunal to rule on constitutional rights issues. She was the sole adjudicator in Stephen Boissoin's case. There was no proven link between what Stephen had said and any act of discrimination. But since Ms. Andreachuk believed that Stephen could be "indirectly responsible", she convicted anyway him without bothering to present any evidence to her claims.

It’s been a busy few days since my “human rights” interrogation on Friday afternoon. As of yesterday, the video clips I uploaded were viewed nearly 200,000 times, making them the 5th most watched “channel” on YouTube. I’d like to thank the blogosphere for covering a story that has been under-reported by the mainstream media, and I’d like to thank generous visitors for their financial support for our legal defence via PayPal. (Ezra Levant.com)

Some columnists however chose to speak up for Ezra Levant and for our freedom of speech. Among them Herman Goodden from London Free Press.

The stifling menace that has been unleashed on Canadian civic life over the last couple decades by those federal and provincial tribunals known as human rights commissions is finally being dragged into the full glare of public scrutiny with the highest profile cases of their kind yet to be heard.

Originally formed as a means to prevent discrimination against minorities in matters of employment and housing, since the 1985 signing into law of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms (and the subsequent broadening of provincial codes), the HRCs have increasingly been preoccupied with Charter challenges.